6.4 The Role of Caregivers

We have seen that young children’s emotions and actions are affected by many factors, including brain maturation, culture, and peers. Now we focus on another primary influence on young children: their caregivers.

All children need parents who care about them because, no matter what the parenting style, parental involvement plays an important role in the development of both social and cognitive competence (Parke & Buriel, 2006). As more and more children spend long hours during early childhood with other adults, alternate caregivers become pivotal as well.

Caregiving Styles

Although thousands of researchers have traced the effects of parenting on child development, the work of one person, more than 50 years ago, continues to be influential. In her original research, Diana Baumrind (1967, 1971) studied 100 preschool children, all from California and almost all middle-class European-Americans. (The cohort and cultural limitations of this sample were not obvious at the time.)

Baumrind found that parents differed on four important dimensions:

  1. Expressions of warmth. Some parents are warm and affectionate; others, cold and critical.
  2. Strategies for discipline. Parents vary in how they explain, criticize, persuade, and punish.
  3. Communication. Some parents listen patiently; others demand silence.
  4. Expectations for maturity. Parents vary in how much responsibility and self-control they expect.

Baumrind’s Four Styles of CaregivingOn the basis of the dimensions listed above, Baumrind identified four parenting styles (summarized in TABLE 6.1).

Table : TABLE 6.1 Characteristics of Parenting Styles Identified by Baumrind
Communication
Style Warmth Discipline Expectations of Maturity Parent to Child Child to Parent
Authoritarian Low Strict, often physical High High Low
Permissive High Rare Low Low High
Authoritative High Moderate, with much discussion Moderate High High
Neglecting-rejecting Low Rare Low Low Low

228

The following long-term effects of parenting styles have been reported in many nations (Baumrind, 2005; Baumrind et al., 2010; Chan & Koo, 2011; Huver et al., 2010; Rothrauff et al., 2009).

Problems With Baumrind’s StylesBaumrmd’s classification is often criticized. Problems include the following:

229

We now know that children’s temperament and the culture’s standards powerfully affect caregivers, as do the consequences of parenting style (Cipriano & Stifter, 2010).

Moving beyond Baumrind’s dimensions, University of Toronto researchers Maayan Davidov and Joan Grusec (2006) focused on two features of positive parenting—responsiveness to distress, and warmth—and the effects of these features on children’s socioemotional functioning. They found that both mothers’ and fathers’ responsiveness to their children’s distress was linked to their children’s negative affective regulation. Mothers’ responsiveness to distress, but not fathers’, was shown to also increase children’s empathy and prosocial responses. Maternal warmth was linked to children’s better regulation of positive affect, but paternal warmth was not. Another study of parenting at age 2 and children’s competence in kindergarten (including emotional regulation and friendships) found multiple developmental pathways, with the best outcomes dependent on both the child and the adult (Blandon et al., 2010).

Also focusing on the emotional dimensions of parenting, Janet Strayer and William Roberts (2004) found that Canadian children were more likely to be angrier with mothers and fathers who were less empathic and warm, and had more age-inappropriate maturity demands. Children’s anger was also linked to fathers who were more authoritarian and mothers who were more likely to use anxiety and guilt control.

Such studies suggest that certain aspects of parenting, like responsiveness to the child’s distress and who the parent is (e.g., mother, father), can make unique contributions to the child’s development.

Cultural Variations

The significance of context is particularly obvious when children of various ethnic groups are compared. It may be that certain alleles are more common in children of one group or another, and that affects their temperament. However, much more influential are the attitudes and actions of adult caregivers. As Kagicibasi (1996) argued, children from more interdependent cultures, where relationships and the group’s needs are placed ahead of individual needs, may interpret high parental control as normal, and not as rejecting or harsh.

Parental InfluenceNorth American parents of Chinese, Caribbean, or African heritage are often stricter, or more authoritarian, than those of European backgrounds, yet their children develop better than if the parents were easygoing (Chao, 2001; Parke & Buriel, 2006). Latino parents are sometimes thought to be too intrusive, other times too permissive—but their children seem to be happier than the children of North American parents who behave the same way (García & García, 2009; Ispa et al., 2004; Moreno, 1991). A three-way interaction seems to influence the outcome of any parenting style: the child’s temperament, the parent’s personality, and the social context.

In 1995, Chao examined Chinese-American and European-American mothers of children aged 2- to 5-years-old in terms of their child-rearing beliefs. She discovered that the way Chinese-American and European-American mothers defined independence in their children differed significantly. For Chinese-Americans, the idea of self-reliance and becoming a contributing member of society was appealing. European-American mothers, in contrast, defined independence as the child’s own growing sense of individuality, self-expression, and separateness from the parents in action and in thought (Chao, 1995). Ten years later, Chuang’s (2006) study of Chinese-Canadian mothers found that the two definitions were relevant, as these mothers defined independence as both self-reliance and separateness from the parents.

230

Pay Attention Children develop best with lots of love and attention. They shouldn’t have to ask for it!
© THE NEW YORKER COLLECTION 2001 PAT BYRNES FROM CARTOONBANK.COM. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

In another study of 1477 instances in which Mexican-American mothers of 4-year-olds tried to get their children to do something they were not doing, most of the time the mothers simply uttered a command and the children complied (Livas-Dlott et al., 2010). This simple strategy, with the mother asserting authority and the children obeying without question, might be considered authoritarian. However, almost never did the mothers use physical punishment or even harsh threats when the children did not immediately do as they were told—which happened 14 percent of the time. For example,

Hailey [a 4-year-old] decided to look for another doll and started digging through her toys, throwing them behind her as she dug. Maricruz [the mother] told Hailey she should not throw her toys. Hailey continued to throw toys, and Maricruz said her name to remind her to stop. Hailey continued her misbehavior, and her mother repeated “Hailey” once more. When Hailey continued, Maricruz raised her voice but calmly directed, “Hailey, look at me.” Hailey continued but then looked at Maricruz as she explained, “You don’t throw toys; you could hurt someone.” Finally, Hailey complied and stopped.

[Livas-Dlott et al., 2010]

Note that the mother’s first three efforts failed, and then a look accompanied by an inaccurate explanation (in that setting, no one could be hurt) succeeded. The researchers explained that these Mexican-American families do not fit any of Baumrind’s categories; respect for adult authority does not mean a hostile mother–child relationship. Instead, the relationship shows evident cariño (caring) (Livas-Dlott et al., 2010).

A study in Hong Kong found that almost all parents believed that young children need strong guidance, including physical punishment. But most classified themselves as authoritative, not authoritarian, because they listened to their children and adjusted their expectations when needed (Chan et al., 2009).

A multicultural study of Canadian parents used parent and teacher ratings of child behaviour to determine if there were cultural differences in terms of parenting and child behaviour. Using teacher ratings of student behaviour, parental harshness was positively related to child aggression in European-Canadian families but negatively related in South Asian-Canadian families. In contrast, when parent ratings of behaviour were used, parental harshness was positively related to children’s aggression for all ethnic groups, although the strength of the relationship varied across ethnic groups (Ho et al., 2008).

In general, multicultural and international research has found that particular discipline methods and family rules are less important than warmth, support, and concern. Children from every ethnic group and every country benefit if they believe that they are appreciated; children everywhere suffer if they feel rejected and unwanted (Gershoff et al., 2010; Khaleque & Rohner, 2002).

231

Given a multicultural and multicontextual perspective, developmentalists hesitate to recommend any particular parenting style (Dishion & Bullock, 2002; J. G. Miller, 2004). That does not mean that all families function equally well—far from it. Signs of trouble include a child’s anxiety, aggression, and inability to play with others. Ineffective, neglectful parents are one cause of such trouble, but not the only one. Another cause, child maltreatment, is discussed at the end of this chapter.

What About Teachers?When Baumrind did her original research, 2- to 5-year-olds were cared for, almost exclusively, by their parents. Now most young children have teachers and other caregivers who can likewise be authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, or neglectful (Ertesvåg, 2011).

Although all four styles are possible for caregivers who watch only one child, almost no teacher is permissive or neglectful. They couldn’t be. Allowing a group of 2- to 5-year-olds to do whatever they want would result in chaos, conflict, and perhaps danger. Young children are not so adept at emotional regulation and impulse control that several of them can safely play together, unguided or unsupervised, for long.

However, teachers can be authoritarian, setting down the law with no exceptions, or authoritative, setting flexible guidelines. Teachers with more education tend to be authoritative, responding to each child, listening and encouraging language, and so on. This fosters more capable children, which is one reason why teacher education is a measure used to indicate the quality of educational programs (Barnett et al., 2010; Norris, 2010).

In general, young children learn more from authoritative teachers because the teachers are perceived as warmer and more loving. In fact, one study found that, compared with children who had authoritarian teachers, those children whose teachers were child-centred, non-controlling, and very supportive scored higher on school-readiness measures (Barbarin et al., 2010).

KEY points

  • Baumrind identified four styles of caregiving: authoritarian, permissive, authoritative, and rejecting-neglecting. Each of these styles has specific effects on child development.
  • Parenting styles differ according to the child’s temperament and cultural variations.
  • Teaching style and the caregiving style of daycare providers can also affect child development.